On Mon 09-08-10 15:05:13, Ted Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2010 at 07:02:16PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> > spin_lock(&journal->j_state_lock);
> > spin_lock(&transaction->t_handle_lock);
> > - transaction->t_outstanding_credits -= handle->h_buffer_credits;
> > - transaction->t_updates--;
> > -
> > - if (!transaction->t_updates)
> > + atomic_sub(handle->h_buffer_credits,
> > + &transaction->t_outstanding_credits);
> > + if (atomic_dec_and_test(&transaction->t_updates))
> >
> > After this a transaction can disappear so subsequent
> > __jbd2_log_start_commit shouldn't dereference transaction->t_tid,
> > right?
>
> I think it should be ok because we're holding j_state_lock(), so the
> transaction can't disappear until we release the j_state_lock.
Ah, OK. You're right. I just thought we eventually want to remove the
lock but you're right that currently the code is fine. Sorry for the noise.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <[email protected]>
SUSE Labs, CR
_______________________________________________
Ocfs2-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://oss.oracle.com/mailman/listinfo/ocfs2-devel
